Seriously, theere as been an uproar about the next-gen M5 using the X5/6M engines. Its lower revving, FI, etc. Our friends in Munich must've seroiusly gotten the memo. The M5 dosent have to be the fastest but it cant simply have its doors blown off. Do we agree on that? So, here is my endorsement.<- not that it matters.. Crank the boost!!

Legal Disclaimer: Anything I or anyone else says about my vehicle on this website(e90post.com or any affiliated or nonaffiliated sites), pertaining to modifications, is only to gain acceptance from my/our peers, and does not actually represent anything actually existing on my car, and thus, cannot be held against me in any issues, i.e. warranty claims, that may arise.

I disagree. Based purely on power, the 55 is better. The 63 sounds better, is more responsive, and more linear.

thats your opinion but doesnt change the fact that most people (from his experience and mine) prefer the 55 over the 63s then again... the 63s keep improving and improving. i think the 55s just have more modding potential but thats about it. i really cant wait til the new E63 comes out though. that thing is going to be a blast to drive i bet...

Wouldnt it be nice if they put in a V-10 with a set of twins like a GT-35 and a tranny and motor that can handle 800whp? I wish they would cut the weight down a bit as well. But seriously a FI M5 is going to be

Displacement always sacrifices fuel economy, even with high technology trickery. The future is not in displacement because the future is not in gasoline.

If high displacement=low fuel economy what is the G8 GXP with a 6.2 liter V8 doing getting almost equal fuel economy as the 4.0 liter V8 that is in the M3( 13/20 for GXP and 14/20 for M3). And the G8 GXP weighs more then the M3. Or the Camaro SS with the same engine gets 16/25?

If high displacement=low fuel economy what is the G8 GXP with a 6.2 liter V8 doing getting almost equal fuel economy as the 4.0 liter V8 that is in the M3( 13/20 for GXP and 14/20 for M3). And the G8 GXP weighs more then the M3. Or the Camaro SS with the same engine gets 16/25?

GM has proven that you can have a high displacement, relatively high horsepower engine and not be a gas guzzler. The tech is out there.

-Adaptive Drive System (anti body roll) and Dynamic Performance Control (torque vector) implemented without making the car feel too artificial and computerized.

-Overall reduced weight. (both from lighter base 5-series, and from liberal use of carbon and aluminum)

-Much increased level of track tuning for hardcore performance

-Much higher level of aero work. This will help in many way. First, it would further visually distinguish the M5 from the normal 5 (good for today's marketing playing field?). Reduced drag and lift would improve stability and reduce wind noise. It could also allow for an even higher top speed (more marketing clout?).

BMW could even take it up to another level by introducing ACTIVE AERO. possibly a retracting front spoiler or an extending rear spoiler (similar to the SL65BS). This would not only help performance, but is a pretty cool talking point.

anyways, if this direction was followed by BMW, I think the M5 would remain as a genuine super-sports sedan, unique from the RS6 and E63AMG.

T bone will not approve of this lol. M5 does need that boost. I love the NA V10's magical high end, but with the CTS-V and RS6, a stock 4 years old design M5 doesn't cut it(But the M5 has aged very well)

thats your opinion but doesnt change the fact that most people (from his experience and mine) prefer the 55 over the 63s then again... the 63s keep improving and improving. i think the 55s just have more modding potential but thats about it. i really cant wait til the new E63 comes out though. that thing is going to be a blast to drive i bet...

bingo. that's the only reason why the guys over at mbworld tend to like the 55s.